Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Recommended Posts

The most dangerous objectors are the silent objectors, they protest with their actions by voting/buying/acting with their feet......actions speak louder than words or visible angry outbursts...

Indeed, but am sure they figure that for every middle-income professional who leaves the UK, there will be someone desperate to come in to continue to pay tax and keep it rolling.

Off to live in the Netherlands for a year or so while I wait for my Canadian skilled migrant visa (hopefully the Carney bombscare there will have cooled). They can get their £50k in annual income taxes for the privilege of working and renting here from someone else [can't stomach giving them ~£12k stamp duty on a FTB flat].

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 78
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Indeed, but am sure they figure that for every middle-income professional who leaves the UK, there will be someone desperate to come in to continue to pay tax and keep it rolling.

Off to live in the Netherlands for a year or so while I wait for my Canadian skilled migrant visa (hopefully the Carney bombscare there will have cooled). They can get their £50k in annual income taxes for the privilege of working and renting here from someone else [can't stomach giving them ~£12k stamp duty on a FTB flat].

The way things are panning out soon the London employers won't afford to pay the London house price/rent wages demanded of them....there must be a better place, another way. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're a bank.

You want to increase your mortgage book without falling foul of the affordability test which stipulates the borrower must be able to make repayments at +3% of the rate at the origination of the loan.

What do you do? You reduce the origination rate for the loan by 3% and increase the fee charged which is added to the loan. i.e. a discount teaser rate.

Next!

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what's been happening and the BoE will continue to ensure happens, yes.

Think of it as the Carney Housing Put if you will.

It's not Carney's housing put, it's Osborne's housing put. Osborne is the one who needs to keep borrowing £120bn/yr to hold the economy upright, subsidise housing costs and maintain these Stalinist levels of capital inefficiency.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The serious issue is NONE of them are fools.

:ph34r:

Well that's the thing...they are clearly not stupid....but i dont think they expected the credit crunch...unless they engineered it to bring down governments...i dunno.they whole thing is mind boggling.

They clearly haven't expected the London mega bubble mania so they are trying to talk it down, pretend ts not a bubble but might turn into one so make noise to calm it down. Will it work....is history littered with tales of sensible economic policies that have created gradual growth in a steady and susainable way? Answer that and i think you have your answer.

Intelligent yes but blinkered fools none the less.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Food and fuel will be consumed less by 10%, no protests. There is no one with the will to protest in large enough numbers.

Mindless thugs rioting in City centres like a couple of years ago maybe. But nothing else.

And I have been told by a policeman in Mcr, that next time they will be ready for them.

Hopefully we will never wee who is right.

Just remember Brown was readying the tanks in 2007. People who can't eat soon revolt.

Edited by TheCountOfNowhere
Link to post
Share on other sites

You're a bank.

You want to increase your mortgage book without falling foul of the affordability test which stipulates the borrower must be able to make repayments at +3% of the rate at the origination of the loan.

What do you do? You reduce the origination rate for the loan by 3% and increase the fee charged which is added to the loan. i.e. a discount teaser rate.

Next!

Really? You think this is an argument?

You're a UK bank.

You realise that you are completely beholden to Carney's Bank of England. Without his backing your funding costs get exciting fast. He has the 2009 Banking Act and UKAR as existing functional machinery to make you disappear before you can say 'Challenger Bank'. When he says "Jump!", you say "How high?".

The way I see it...

You're a bank senior exec. You want to extract as much lucre as possible from where you are. Drawing down big cash packages is politically tricky. Better to hold on for a while longer, reap the benefits of some suitably constructed stock options etc. If you're playing a 3-5 year game in the current house price/interest environment do you really want to game the people who control your solvency?

It's a brave new world. A command economy for money. We don't need economists, we need Kremlinologists of Threadneedle Street.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, barring an exogenous shock.

We had one of those in 2008 and it was a buying opportunity no?

Could have been, although London prices barely dropped for more than a week in April 2009! :P

I have no idea what will bring this current bullishness to an end but I don't see it lasting the next 10 years! I sure there will be a shock or 2! I wish I knew where or when they will be! :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully we will never wee who is right.

Just remember Brown was readying the tanks in 2007. People who can't eat soon revolt.

“There are only nine meals between mankind and anarchy” was first said by writer Alfred Henry Lewis (1855-1914) in a March 1906 issue of Cosmopolitan Magazine. Apparently.

Edited by renting til I die
Link to post
Share on other sites

You're a bank.

You want to increase your mortgage book without falling foul of the affordability test which stipulates the borrower must be able to make repayments at +3% of the rate at the origination of the loan.

What do you do? You reduce the origination rate for the loan by 3% and increase the fee charged which is added to the loan. i.e. a discount teaser rate.

Next!

Fantasy, imo. However we're entering a critical stage, where the messages and signals put to market are deliberately confusing - including so called strong demand for mortgages being hailed by the press, and "banks eager to lend" stories.

My family isn't moved by it, unwilling to pay x2+ what we think house prices are worth. Tens and hundreds of thousands of pounds more than we believe they are worth against an economy that has forces of contraction in play. There are two sides to the lending equation; needs banks willing to lend, and also needs credit worthy borrowers wanting/willing to approach banks to borrow. My bet is their number are diminishing.

And a hard-crash to being VI back to earth - as a good thing - complacent about the value of their homes, and under the belief crashes are never good; actively encouraging people to buy whatever the price to "get on with their lives."

Bloomberg
Fed's Yellen Says Reluctance to Lend Holding Back Housing Recovery
Wednesday, 18 Jun 2014
Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen said banks’ reluctance to lend to any but the best credit risks is holding back the housing recovery.
“It is difficult for any homeowner who doesn’t have pristine credit these days to get a mortgage,” Yellen said at a press conference in Washington following the central bank’s policy meeting. That, she said, is ’’one of the factors that is causing the housing recovery to be slow.’’
“It is important for us to work to clarify the rules around mortgage lending to create an environment of greater certainty” so lenders can extend more credit, she said.

Quite. The sudden stop in the market meant there was little liquidity and a temporary crash in transactions / market clearing and in truth no reasonable way to determine prices.

Of course a sudden stop in credit markets/transactions causes prices to fall, but to argue that is a good thing is bonkers, unless you're mega wealthy cash rich and use it to steal land from the relatively less well off.

When will HPCers and 'economists' get the obvious?

It is NOT about building. it is about credit.

The timidity of the banking system appears to have been general and widespread. Indeed, the 1939 survey found that over half the reasons given for credit refusals by banks were "bank policy"; only a third were because of "the condition of the borrowing concern."
-Michael A.Bernstein
The Great Depression
Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? You think this is an argument?

You're a UK bank.

He presumes banks want to lend to expand their books - not as I see it, in any significant volume way. Of course they'll accept last of the credit-worthy buyers plonking down big deposits.

Banks just about sucked in all of the dumb money already.

It's not a good thing in RK's world for values to fall - bonkers apparently. Pity the outright owners/equity rich around here, with their £300,000 terraces - £1m+ detached houses, if prices fell. They're so less well off than Rothschild types. Bonkers to have a crash.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? You think this is an argument?

You're a UK bank.

You realise that you are completely beholden to Carney's Bank of England. Without his backing your funding costs get exciting fast. He has the 2009 Banking Act and UKAR as existing functional machinery to make you disappear before you can say 'Challenger Bank'. When he says "Jump!", you say "How high?".

The way I see it...

You're a bank senior exec. You want to extract as much lucre as possible from where you are. Drawing down big cash packages is politically tricky. Better to hold on for a while longer, reap the benefits of some suitably constructed stock options etc. If you're playing a 3-5 year game in the current house price/interest environment do you really want to game the people who control your solvency?

It's a brave new world. A command economy for money. We don't need economists, we need Kremlinologists of Threadneedle Street.

Carney said yesterday that's exactly what they expect to happen. Indeed they were setting out the FPC roadmap yesterday to enable it to happen. Hence why I've called it the Carney housing put.

Government wants it. Carney wants it. The banks want it. We've the TSB which is stuffed to the gills with capital, Virgin bank, Aldemore etc etc. Carney's plan to raise HPI along in a more measured wage gets everybody off the hook. The biggest shock will be if it doesn't happen frankly. That's where you need to construct your arguments and reasoning. What will stop productivity expanding, nominal wages rising at their target, unemployment falling (remember Osborne's 'full employment' target?). Real price changes are more tricky, but nominal rises are within their gift. I understand why people don't want it, but I'm at a loss to understand the economic arguments leading to it not happening as the likely outcome.

Nominal prices have risen 50x in the last 50 years or so. It's deeply puzzling why people believe 20% over the next 4-5 years will be a struggle with central bank & govt. setting it as their target.

Edited by R K
Link to post
Share on other sites

He presumes banks want to lend to expand their books - not as I see it, in any significant volume way. Of course they'll accept last of the credit-worthy buyers plonking down big deposits.

Banks just about sucked in all of the dumb money already.

It's not a good thing in RK's world for values to fall - bonkers apparently. Pity the outright owners/equity rich around here, with their £300,000 terraces - £1m+ detached houses, if prices fell. They're so less well off than Rothschild types. Bonkers to have a crash.

Can we avoid ad hominems please?

There's plenty of govt., CB policy, housing and economic data to talk about without resorting to unsubstantiated name calling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your position frustrates me. There are other participants in the market other than those who've already chosen to buy, and especially equity rich older. It's not bonkers to want a house price crash, and it would personally be a 'good thing' for my family - paying £100Ks less. Some of us aren't claiming our final salary big pensions yet, but still have to put something aside for those times.

What you seem to get excited about doesn't let everyone off the hook. Antagonising with "Buy a house - get on with your life." BoE can't force people to borrow, which is where I think the weakness is.

What BoE wants is credit growth and I doubt they'll get that with house prices as painfully expensive as they are. I struggle with your reasoning, given stress tests coming in, and MMR here now, and more tweaks to temper lending, at current prices.

For Mark Carney, Governor of the Bank of England, use of the Bank’s newly endowed “macro-prudential tool kit” is very much the preferred alternative to the blunt instrument of higher interest rates. Why risk the recovery with more expensive money, he asks, when you can attack the unwanted side-effects of years of low interest rates by regulating credit availability and allocation?

Superficially, it sounds appealing. Ordinary price and wage inflation is tame as tame can be, yet house prices are again approaching double-digit growth, and in certain parts of London it is back at 20 per cent plus.

“Why is that the case? Things have changed. Households have a lot of debt. The Government is consolidating its financial position. Europe is weak. The pound is strong. The financial system has been fundamentally changed – it has to carry a lot more capital, it has lot carry a lot more liquidity insurance and it will pass on those costs to borrowers.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/interest-rates/10929882/Mark-Carney-new-normal-will-see-rates-go-to-2.5pc-and-stay-there.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Carney said yesterday that's exactly what they expect to happen. Indeed they were setting out the FPC roadmap yesterday to enable it to happen. Hence why I've called it the Carney housing put.

Government wants it. Carney wants it. The banks want it. We've the TSB which is stuffed to the gills with capital, Virgin bank, Aldemore etc etc. Carney's plan to raise HPI along in a more measured wage gets everybody off the hook. The biggest shock will be if it doesn't happen frankly. That's where you need to construct your arguments and reasoning. What will stop productivity expanding, nominal wages rising at their target, unemployment falling (remember Osborne's 'full employment' target?). Real price changes are more tricky, but nominal rises are within their gift. I understand why people don't want it, but I'm at a loss to understand the economic arguments leading to it not happening as the likely outcome.

Nominal prices have risen 50x in the last 50 years or so. It's deeply puzzling why people believe 20% over the next 4-5 years will be a struggle with central bank & govt. setting it as their target.

So price targeting will work where inflation targeting has failed? Your unswerving confidence in this New Keynesian act of levitation seems some what at odds with the fact that it's only ever been attempted once in Sweden briefly, decades ago, and never again since.

Edited by zugzwang
Link to post
Share on other sites

Warner, Telegraph commenting on the FPC today..........

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/mark-carney/10928217/House-prices-stop-meddling-Mark-Carney-and-bite-the-bullet-on-interest-rates.html

(Stop messing and bite the bullet on interest rate rises)

It's that old comment....believe what they do, not what they say.

They never stop saying stuff right now.......what they have done is print money and keep interest rates at 0.5%. for 5-6 years.

Something has got to be done about this independent BoE because it sure is independent from the general population of the UK.

Merv was terrible but this bloke now is nothing short of a disaster for us all in my opinion.

Edited by TheCountOfNowhere
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's that old comment....believe what they do, not what they say.

They never stop saying stuff right now.......what they have done is print money and keep interest rates at 0.5%. for 5-6 years.

Something has got to be done about this independent BoE because it sure is independent from the general population of the UK.

Merv was terrible but this bloke now is nothing short of a disaster for us all in my opinion.

It's all down to managing the bail-outs. Many people, who borrowed more than they could repay, and should be standing in line with their soup bowls, are smugly living the high life. The same goes for some institutions and those individuals who invested in them.

Bail-outs are the most unacceptable form of socialism.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your position frustrates me.

It's not 'my position'. I'm giving my considered view on what the likely outcome is going to be based on the data, govt. policy & central bank policy.

Don't you want to consider what the likely outcome is going to be if you're going (or not going) to buy a property?

Your frustration isn't a justification for ad homs. I'm always interested in well thought through arguments based on data & policy why the likely outcome might not obtain.

What you seem to get excited about doesn't let everyone off the hook. Antagonising with "Buy a house - get on with your life." BoE can't force people to borrow, which is where I think the weakness is

Again, that's a personal comment. I'm not 'excited' about anything. Yesterday was probably the most significant event at the BoE since they announced QE. This stuff is crucially important for anyone interested in the UK housing market.

I'm entitled to my view on the FPC's statements. If you choose to believe 'buy a house' when it's clear nominal house prices are going to be supported to rise by at least 20% in the next 4-5 years is 'antagonistic' then that's your personal issue. It's nothing to do with me. It's clear that's the most likely outcome and one which I'd thought is a crucial factor to consider.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So price targeting will work where inflation targeting has failed? Your unswerving confidence in this New Keynesian act of levitation seems some what at odds with the fact that it's only ever been attempted once in Sweden briefly, decades ago, and never again since.

I'm not sure what point(s) you're making here.

Inflation targetting has worked almost too well. Compared to inflation when I started working in 1979 it's been very successful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not 'my position'. I'm giving my considered view on what the likely outcome is going to be based on the data, govt. policy & central bank policy.

Don't you want to consider what the likely outcome is going to be if you're going (or not going) to buy a property?

Your frustration isn't a justification for ad homs. I'm always interested in well thought through arguments based on data & policy why the likely outcome might not obtain.

Again, that's a personal comment. I'm not 'excited' about anything. Yesterday was probably the most significant event at the BoE since they announced QE. This stuff is crucially important for anyone interested in the UK housing market.

I'm entitled to my view on the FPC's statements. If you choose to believe 'buy a house' when it's clear nominal house prices are going to be supported to rise by at least 20% in the next 4-5 years is 'antagonistic' then that's your personal issue. It's nothing to do with me. It's clear that's the most likely outcome and one which I'd thought is a crucial factor to consider.

Quite right, you should be able to give your analysis without everyone complaining in this fashion

These forums often have far too much confusion between "what should happen" and "what will happen", to be fair each of these is a valid thing to debate by those who choose to do so, but they are very different!

R K, I'm going to guess your view on "what should happen" probably differs a fair way from your view on "what will happen" but you probably don't want to go too far into that on this thread for fear of confusing things

Would be great to hear from you in respect of my post yesterday, do you still see a London bubble pop and do you think this deliberate pushing upwards of house prices is part of the grand 18-year cycle and the next top will be circa 2025?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not 'my position'. I'm giving my considered view on what the likely outcome is going to be based on the data, govt. policy & central bank policy.

Don't you want to consider what the likely outcome is going to be if you're going (or not going) to buy a property?

Your frustration isn't a justification for ad homs. I'm always interested in well thought through arguments based on data & policy why the likely outcome might not obtain.

Again, that's a personal comment. I'm not 'excited' about anything. Yesterday was probably the most significant event at the BoE since they announced QE. This stuff is crucially important for anyone interested in the UK housing market.

I'm entitled to my view on the FPC's statements. If you choose to believe 'buy a house' when it's clear nominal house prices are going to be supported to rise by at least 20% in the next 4-5 years is 'antagonistic' then that's your personal issue. It's nothing to do with me. It's clear that's the most likely outcome and one which I'd thought is a crucial factor to consider.

Yes of course you are entitled to give your views, which I'm forced to consider, for I've always recognised you are intelligent with many smart calls on other investment markets - with a long background in high finance or investment banking or accountancy, was my conclusion, from some of your older posts.

It's a forum, with views on the housing market and economy - and a bit of winding people up goes along with that - for it seems you indulge in it occasionally - and sometimes you've had a go at me too, letting off a bit of annoyance towards my position; it's all fair to me. I'm careful not to take things that far though.

Yet I don't buy what the BoE is selling here, nor your reading of it, but you are entitled to your view of course.

Central banks, and banks in general, have a long history of wrong-footing the market, encouraging certain behaviour, which may not be in an individual's best interests, but overall my be required to balance out some other position. And of denying or smoothing nerves when it's clear to most (with a mind - not a victim who expects bail-outs) at the time they don't believe their own position, let alone in retrospect.

As the housing bubble burst in 2006, Fed Chairman Bernanke assured us that “Our assessment is that this looks to be a very orderly and moderate kind of cooling.”
In 2007, when it could no longer be denied that it had been a bubble which had burst, and as the economy headed toward the 2008 financial meltdown, he said, “Our assessment is that there’s not much indication that subprime mortgage issues will spread into the broader mortgage market, which still seems healthy.”
...So, has the Fed reached the typical point in this cycle where its optimistic projections will continue, but fly in the face of the facts, and will not fool markets?
Banks will want to lend money to you at an inappropriate time. The secret of success is being able to sell yourself to the right people. Don't you think that the banks know this? If they think you are a good bet, they want to `sell' you money. The clever bit about selling is that the seller decides when the intended victim will buy, and the subtle thing about buying is buying exactly when you want to.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes of course you are entitled to give your views, which I'm forced to consider, for I've always recognised you are intelligent with many smart calls on other investment markets - with a long background in high finance or investment banking or accountancy, was my conclusion, from some of your older posts.

It's a forum, with views on the housing market and economy - and a bit of winding people up goes along with that - for it seems you indulge in it occasionally - and sometimes you've had a go at me too, letting off a bit of annoyance towards my position; it's all fair to me. I'm careful not to take things that far though.

Yet I don't buy what the BoE is selling here, nor your reading of it, but you are entitled to your view of course.

Central banks, and banks in general, have a long history of wrong-footing the market, encouraging certain behaviour, which may not be in an individual's best interests, but overall my be required to balance out some other position. And of denying or smoothing nerves when it's clear to most (with a mind - not a victim who expects bail-outs) at the time they don't believe their own position, let alone in retrospect.

You're not 'forced to consider' my views or anyone elses.

All I ask is that you don't ad hom me.

It's not 'my view' that wages will rise 4% p.a. - that's the central view of the BoE. It's all there in the BoE papers I linked up earlier in the thread as expressed by the Governor of the BoE.

I agree completely that people should read the papers, look at the data and come to their own considered view for their personal circumstances. That's precisely why I'm asking you not to ad hom me for doing exactly that.

Re your point about central banks wanting to wrong foot the public - I think it's more that the public don't listen or read what the central bank are saying over a period of time. They're not good at reading the signals. The signals in Spring '09 were VERY louf and clear, and they that rates would stay low and asset prices would rise. They were spelling it out for you that it was the best time you were likely to get to buy property or other assets.

Unfortunately most people prefer not to listen to these tom tom drums, preferring to scream at the top of their voice for some other outcome. An outcome that ain't going to go their way. They take the wrong side of the trade at the wrong time.

That's a shame. 5 years down the line and houses are now more expensive as a result. The best opportunity was missed. In general houses now certainly aren't in a bubble nor are they overly expensive (imo) outside of London/SE. They may appear that way in the context of 80s/90s interest rates, but they're not when adjusted for current and likely future rates. % of income are actually quite reasonable. Wages according to the BoE will rise c 20% over the next 4-5 years and house price lending is nowhere near the limits they have just set.

For those people genuinely wanting to buy a home for the long term the conditions since 2009 have been favourable. Smart buyers know this.

Those of us pointing this out since 2009 have taken a great deal of flack for saying it - which is a shame for those people who have are now 5 years down the line and are now seeing base rates still at 0.5%, real rates still negative, and the BoE essentially guaranteeing (as far as they ever would) a put under the market for the remainder of this cycle.

That's how I see it. I'm not pulling it out of my ar5e. I'm using exactly the same information you have public access to. You've (presumably) chosen to draw a different conclusion. That's nothing whatsoever to do with me. I accept that the conclusion I've come to may well turn out to be wrong (I've only been right for 5 years, so not that long in the scheme of things and it was a very easy call imo - but it may not hold for say the next 5 years, who knows. I've outlined possible shocks and there will be others that aren't knowable). Please though, don't make assumptions based on my objective view, and refrain from personal attacks. They're unwarranted and unwelcome.

If you don't want to read my posts that's great. I couldn't care less. Put me on ignore. I'm sure I'll live.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...

Unfortunately most people prefer not to listen to these tom tom drums, preferring to scream at the top of their voice for some other outcome. An outcome that ain't going to go their way. They take the wrong side of the trade at the wrong time.

That's a shame. 5 years down the line and houses are now more expensive as a result. The best opportunity was missed. In general houses now certainly aren't in a bubble nor are they overly expensive (imo) outside of London/SE. They may appear that way in the context of 80s/90s interest rates, but they're not when adjusted for current and likely future rates. % of income are actually quite reasonable. Wages according to the BoE will rise c 20% over the next 4-5 years and house price lending is nowhere near the limits they have just set.

For those people genuinely wanting to buy a home for the long term the conditions since 2009 have been favourable. Smart buyers know this.

...

In other news man dying of cancer healthy except for the cancer. (Watch from the beginning. Pay off at about 3'30" but worth waiting for...)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9rLrNxuamc

Link to post
Share on other sites

The best opportunity was missed. In general houses now certainly aren't in a bubble nor are they overly expensive (imo) outside of London/SE. They may appear that way in the context of 80s/90s interest rates, but they're not when adjusted for current and likely future rates. % of income are actually quite reasonable. Wages according to the BoE will rise c 20% over the next 4-5 years and house price lending is nowhere near the limits they have just set.

For those people genuinely wanting to buy a home for the long term the conditions since 2009 have been favourable. Smart buyers know this.

Those of us pointing this out since 2009 have taken a great deal of flack for saying it - which is a shame for those people who have are now 5 years down the line and are now seeing base rates still at 0.5%, real rates still negative, and the BoE essentially guaranteeing (as far as they ever would) a put under the market for the remainder of this cycle.

It aint over till its over.

Houses are overly expensive in the context of historic interest rate 'norms', yes. Today we learned some more detail about how much the base rate WILL rise and over what time period. Anyone buying within the last few years is leveraged to an extreme, praying that rates won't move. Well, they will. We heard they will. And when they start low, they don't need to move much to impact heavily on the over leveraged.

From current 0.5 to stated 2.5 is 2% increase. When you consider mortgage rates are around 4% (at best from this perspective) that movement takes trackers from 4% to 6%, an increase of 50%. If you're on interest only you're in serious trouble if you bought at this 'best opportunity'.

Buy to letters buying at this 'best opportunity' are in some serious trouble, typically buy to let mortgages are interest only. A tenant is not going to stump up another 400 quid a month on a typical 800 quid a month rental within the next 3 years, 4% pay increase or no.

When the buy to letters exit in response to this, prices for everyone are going south. 2009 a best opportunity? It was only an opportunity to leverage yourself up to the hilt. If the base stays at 0.5% for the 25 years of your mortgage you're ok. Well, its not.

It aint over till its over.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.